TABLE OF CONTENTS
S1 Merchant, J.A., & Hall, J.L.
S2 Howard, J.
S3 Merchant et al. A Conversation on Total Worker Health
S8 Schill, A.L., & Chosewood, L.C. The NIOSH Total Worker Health™ Program: An Overview
S12 Sorensen, G., McLellan, D., Dennerlein, J.T., Pronk, N.P., Allen, J.D., Boden, L.I., Okechukwu, C.A., Hashimoto, D., Stoddard, A., & Wagner, G.R. Integration of Health Protection and Health Promotion: Rationale, Indicators, and Metrics
S19 Punnett, L., Warren, N., Henning, R., Nobrega, S., Cherniack, M. & the CPH-NEW Research Team Participatory Ergonomics as a Model for Integrated Programs to Prevent Chronic Disease
S25 Hammer, L.B. & Sauter, S. Total Worker Health and Work-Life Stress
S30 Pronk, N.P. Integrated Worker Health Protection and Promotion Programs: Overview and Perspectives on Health and Economic Outcomes
S38 Cherniack, M. Integrated Health Programs, Health Outcomes, and Return on Investment: Measuring Workplace Health Promotion and Integrated Program Effectiveness
S46 Parkinson, M.D. Employer Health and Productivity Roadmap™ Strategy
S52 Sepulveda, M.-J. From Worker Health to Citizen Health: Moving Upstream
S58 Luckhaupt, S.E. & Sestito, J.P. Examining National Trends in Worker Health With the National Health Interview Survey
S63 Umukoro, P.E., Arias, O.E., Stoffel, S.D., Hopcia, K., Sorensen, G., & Dennerlein, J.T. Physical Activity at Work Contributes Little to Patient Care Workers' Weekly Totals
S69 Rohlman, D.S., Parish, M., Elliot, D.L., Montgomery, D., & Hanson, G. Characterizing the Needs of a Young Working Population: Making the Case for Total Worker Health in an Emerging Workforce
S73 Merchant, J.A., Lind, D.P., Kelly, K.M., & Hall, J.L. An Employee Total Health Management–Based Survey of Iowa Employers
S78 Hudson, H., & Hall, J. Value of Social Media in Reaching and Engaging Employers in Total Worker Health
S82 Fethke, N.B., Merlino, L., & Gerr, F. Effect of Ergonomics Training on the Agreement Between Expert and Nonexpert Ratings of the Potential for Musculoskeletal Harm in Manufacturing Tasks
S86 Robertson, M., Henning, R., Warren, N., Nobrega, S., Dove-Steinkamp, M., Tibirica, L., Bizarro, A. & the CPH-NEW Research Team The Intervention Design and Analysis Scorecard: A Planning Tool for Participatory Design of Integrated Health and Safety Interventions in the Workplace
The University of Iowa College of Public Health, Healthier Workforce Center for Excellence, was pleased to host the first Total Worker Health™ (TWH) Symposium—Safe, Healthy and Cost-Effective Solutions—on November 30 and December 1, 2012. The goals of the Symposium were to bring together investigators from the four National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Centers of Excellence to Promote a Healthier Workforce, NIOSH TWH investigators and administrators, other national TWH leaders who serve as Center advisors, and Iowa practice and policy leaders, to present, and discuss TWH research, practice, and policy. One hundred twenty participants from 18 states and Washington, DC, participated in the Symposium.
The Symposium was organized into six sessions, each with a plenary presentation by a senior investigator addressing a major TWH theme. Each session also included a research and research-to-practice presentation, and in the final session, a policy panel presentation–-all intended to be consistent with the content covered by the plenary presentation. Those submitting abstracts for presentation at the Symposium not selected for a platform presentation by the Symposium Program Committee, composed of the four TWH Center directors, were invited to present posters of their work. Not all presenters submitted manuscripts, and not all manuscripts were accepted for publication after peer review.
Gathering together many of the national leaders in developing the national TWH agenda offered an opportunity to gain candid perspectives from NIOSH Director John Howard and 17 other senior participants on how they individually define TWH, how TWH can make a difference in the workplace, and the value or return-on-investment of TWH. Their comments compose an interesting commentary on TWH as NIOSH continues to implement this promising, but still young, national program intended to provide the research foundation to assist employers and employees realize the tremendous opportunity for a healthier and more productive workforce.
James A. Merchant, MD, DrPH
Professor and Director
Healthier Workforce Center for Excellence
College of Public Health
The University of Iowa
Jennifer L. Hall, EdD, MCHES
Associate Director for Outreach
Healthier Workforce Center for Excellence
College of Public Health
The University of Iowa
Welcome to the 2012 Total Worker Health™ Symposium: Safe, Healthy and Cost-Effective Solutions. Thank you, Dr Merchant and everyone at the University of Iowa, for bringing us all together. I want to briefly talk to you about worker health and well-being—research, programs, laws and regulations. There are 311 million Americans in the United States and 155 million of those Americans are workers. Even though many of us who work have health insurance, there are some workers who have no health insurance and these are perhaps the most vulnerable of all workers. Many workers without health insurance work in the riskiest occupations, and they are assigned the riskiest work. Often their employment is very precarious. They suffer injury, illness, and death at a greater proportion than other workers—those more like the folks in this room—myself included, who are blessed with employer-sponsored health insurance. But whether you are in one group or the other, you are in a medical care system that is unsustainable. If you look at the percentage of the gross domestic product that the American health care system expends every year, and you project the current rate to 2030, such spending becomes economically unsustainable. It is impossible to run a country when 27% to 30% of the gross domestic product is tied up in health care.
So, there is a problem. We all know it. There are still differing opinions about how to solve it, even today, even after the Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010 (ACA), even after the Supreme Court reviewed and upheld it, and even after a presidential election occurred in which one candidate said he would repeal it and another candidate said he would go forward with it. It is a fact that the ACA is something that all of us, if we truly believe in Total Worker Health™, need to integrate into our thinking, our concepts, our programs, and our research.
The unsustainability of the medical care system is something that the ACA attempts to attack—head on. Critics say not enough, but it is a start. When you look at the cost-containment strategy within the Act, you can sum it up in one word: prevention. Prevention is the cost-containment strategy embedded in the ACA, and prevention is something that we in occupational safety and health do all the time. It is something that employers care very much about, workers care very much about, and workers' families care about. When a worker is not at work, whatever the reason—whether the cause is occupational or nonoccupational—that worker is losing money, the worker's family is adversely affected, the worker's employer is adversely affected, the productivity of the enterprise in which the worker is involved is adversely affected, the regional economic output is adversely affected, and the nation's economic output is adversely affected. Occupational health—Total Worker Health™—has a role to play in the cost-containment strategy that is at the heart of the ACA. After all, occupational health is economic health.
Just this past week, three regulations were published jointly by the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Treasury, and the Department of Labor. You need to read them, understand them, comment on them, and integrate them into your efforts to bring the concept of Total Worker Health™ to every worker and employer in the United States. The first regulation prohibits insurers from discriminating against Americans with preexisting conditions. Premiums can only be based on age, family size, geography, and history of tobacco use (a prevention strategy embedded within premium pricing). The second regulation establishes requirements for essential health benefits. All health insurance has to provide 10 essential benefits. Regional spottiness in health benefits will be a thing of the past. The third regulation concerns two types of employee wellness programs—participatory wellness programs and health-contingent wellness programs. We all need to read that regulation and integrate it into our forward thinking about how we achieve Total Worker Health™-–how we integrate occupational safety and health protection with disease prevention and health promotion.
We are in a new world now. On October 1, 2013, those who have no health insurance can start signing up for health insurance through their state's health insurance marketplaces, formerly called “state exchanges.” For those states that decline to operate a health insurance marketplace, the Department of Health and Human Services will operate one for the state.
There is much to come. The world will change in 2014 and 2015 for all of us who care about the health of the worker and the economic health of the nation. You need to understand that to make prevention work as cost containment depends on what you do, the research that you generate, on the Total Worker Health™ programs and demonstration projects that you launch. We need to show, in the next few years, that prevention does work. We need to show that it works from the worker perspective, the employer perspective, and the national perspective. We need to show that occupational health is economic health.
People in Washington talk about “bending curves.” For example, the First Lady's initiative to prevent obesity in children sets out to bend the curve of the childhood obesity epidemic. Health care costs are rising, and we all have to work to bend that curve. You have a role to play in bending that curve. We have to take our old twentieth-century idea of work-related injury and illness, and transform it into worker injury and illness. We have to move in a new direction because the past is unsustainable.
Your research, your demonstration projects, and your interventions—all have a great role to play. We need to know the answers to what works in Total Worker Health™ and what does not work. You need to inform all of us, both from the practice perspective and the economic perspective. You need to show the nation that Total Worker Health™ is a strategy that can help fulfill the ACA promise of disease prevention and health promotion.
Thank you very much for all the work you do and all the work you are going to do after getting new ideas from this Symposium. At NIOSH, we want to support this effort as much as we can in an austere budget era. Total Worker Health™ is vital to the health of working men and women, private enterprise, and the nation's economy.
Thank you very much and have a great Symposium!
John Howard, MD
Commentary: A Conversation on Total Worker Health
The benefits of workplace programs, policies, and practices that enhance employee well-being have been gaining recognition and approval over the past two decades. In 2004, NIOSH implemented the WorkLife Initiative to focus national attention on integration of health protection and health promotion programs. The WorkLife Initiative Center for Excellence Program was begun in 2006 and expanded in 2011, the same year that it became the Total Worker Health™ (TWH) Program. Yet, TWH, and its underlying concept of integration of employee health protection and health promotion programs, is not widely understood—especially among smaller employers. Several participants in the TWH Symposium share their views about TWH, how successful programs make a difference, and the return on investing in TWH.
What Is TWH?
It is integrating the traditional occupational safety and health protection that we have been doing since the Occupational Safety and Health Act was passed, with health promotion. What we are trying to do is broaden the spotlight that we have had for 43 years on work-related injury and illness to an expanded view of human capital. So TWH means that we are talking about what affects the worker as a whole, rather than dividing “occupational” from “nonoccupational.” We need to be more holistic in the twenty-first century.
–John Howard, MD
Congress passed a law that was called the Occupational Safety and Health Act, not the Occupational Safety or Health Act. Whether we are talking about safety versus disease, it is the same lifestyle, the same risk factors at work.
–Wesley Alles, PhD
Senior Research Scientist, Stanford University
“Integrating” was the word we used for our 2005 IOM report “Integrating Employee Health,” referring to the sum of the components intended to make workers healthier, safer, more productive, and more resilient. The model we developed for that report encompassed not only traditional occupational health and safety but also behavioral health programs such as Employee Assistance Programs for substance abuse or depression, health information portals (increasingly electronic), incentive programs, access to exercise facilities, access to good primary care, and a number of other components. Even more important than the “integration” definition is asking: “Do workers have these services?” “And are they benefiting from them?” Those are the challenges we face as researchers, to document answers to these questions and measure their impact.
–James A. Merchant, MD, DrPH, Director,
Healthier Workforce Center for Excellence (HWCE)
University of Iowa College of Public Health
Our definition is multifaceted, and our best bet is to keep it multifaceted. We can do TWH in many different ways.
–Leslie Hammer, PhD
Associate Director, Oregon Healthy WorkForce Center
Director, Occupational Health Psychology,
Portland State University
At the level of professionals who work in occupational health and safety and in worksite health promotion, TWH can mean making people with different skill sets aware of what others can contribute. But we need to remember those professional disciplines have little meaning to individual workers. They experience their job and their work environment without putting them into bins labeled “physical workload,” “psychosocial stress,” “work schedule,” “unfriendly supervisor,” and, hopefully, some positives as well.
–Laura Punnett, ScD
Co-Director, Center for the Promotion of Health in the
New England Workforce
University of Massachusetts-Lowell
In a broad sense, TWH is keeping people healthy, making them healthier, and allowing them to achieve their aspirations at work. People spend a lot of time at work, and being in that environment for as long as they are, they have a lot of exposures to everything from the environment to relationships with people to interaction with tools and machines. They have to eat, and they share stories. To the extent that you can use those as opportunities to create and reinforce things that are good for people's health, you can have an enormous influence that spills over to every other aspect of people's lives.
–Martin Sepulveda, MD, FACP
IBM Fellow and Vice President
There is the workplace component. Occupational safety and health has entered the general thinking of the work environment. We can go into workplaces that are fairly difficult in terms of pay or hours, but yet there is attention to exposure and often to engaging the workforce in health and safety related to exposure. Our view is that the same thing can be done around health issues, so we think in individual terms, of people being able to make mediations. And ultimately we recognize that people do have to take responsibility—that is called health self-efficacy.
–Martin Cherniack, MD, MPH
Co-Director, Center for the Promotion of Health in the
New England Workplace
University of Connecticut
TWH means fitness and performance for whatever an employee wants to do.
–Michael Parkinson, MD, MPH, FACPM
Senior Medical Director, UPMC (University of Pittsburgh Medical Center) Health Plan and UPMC WorkPartners
How Can TWH Make a Difference?
Our aim is to enhance individual well-being for the benefit of both the person—they feel better in their home life, their work life—and the employer, whose employees will be more productive and engaged in their work. And we are hoping TWH also spills over to families and the community.
–Anita Schill, PhD, MPH,MA
Senior Science Advisor, NIOSH
Using a TWH approach makes a difference for the worker because this integrated approach addresses their overall health and safety. It makes a difference for the employers because it creates efficiencies in their program, and the effects are greater as a whole.
–Jack Dennerlein, PhD
Co-Director, Center for Work, Health, and Wellbeing
Harvard School of Public Health
Anytime you can increase the collaboration and cooperation among the silo-ed parts of an organization, you are going to be better off. You will increase communication, and you will have a better way to manage change and to introduce new programs or ways of manufacturing.
–L. Casey Chosewood, MD
Senior Medical Officer, NIOSH
I think there are gaps in many worksite health promotion programs that can be remedied by a better understanding of the impact of working conditions on people.
It will force us to take a more employee-centric view, rather that defining programs by disease or injury or medical versus mental (or by cost). If we can share with employees a common vision of what a “best place” to work looks and feels like, we can align incentives, infrastructure, and the workplace environment so that healthier behaviors, prevention of illness and injury, and safe work practices become the norm.
There is a law of economics that says the more people that work in a country, the more vital the economy of that country. So we are trying to apply that at the enterprise level. Let us keep all your employees as healthy as they can be, so they can flourish, their families can flourish, your enterprise can flourish, and the economy can flourish. We are essentially saying that traditional occupational health, married with the health promotion, is economic health.
My focus is young workers. If we could help them start off with this safety–health balance, by having it integrated from the get-go, they will be thinking about how to stay healthy and safe at work because that is all they know. Another important population for us to focus on is vulnerable workers, such as immigrants or low-wage workers. We can also help them to have resources.
–Diane Rohlman, PhD
Associate Director, Principal Investigator, HWCE
University of Iowa College of Public Health
What Does a Successful TWH Program Look Like?
At the programmatic level—what workers see—messages would acknowledge the shared effects of the work environment and health behaviors. At the level of policies that set the stage for worker health outcomes, those policies would also be linked. For example, an organization might adopt a policy around respiratory health, which would include both the reduction of potential exposures on the job and a tobacco use policy.
–Glorian Sorensen, PhD
Director, Center for Work, Health, and Wellbeing
Harvard School of Public Health
A successful program is well designed, has specific aims laid out, a written plan of intervention—essentially the elements of quality improvement, meaning understanding where you are at baseline, setting a target, defining the intervention, and tracking the performance. Another piece that is critical is engaging the workers themselves in the design, evaluation, and monitoring of the program. Programs that are “top-down” are not going to be as successful as ones that engage the people who are going to be affected.
–Neil Kohatsu, MD, MPH
Medical Director, California Department of Health Care Services
It respects the worker as a whole human, thinking about their family, their health, and their contribution to the work environment.
The first thing you need is participation—a certain critical mass. Then you need to “sell” the program. And get everyone involved in health appraisals; people have to know their numbers. And finally you need to keep people involved. Employers start on the road, and then participation drops off, enthusiasm wanes. You are trying to change people's lifestyle, the way they think and live, and that is not easy. One of the reasons that we have funded centers is that we need to show where TWH works (and not only in large employment settings but medium-sized and small ones), how it works, and what does and does not work. So when an employer says, “I want to give health club memberships...,” we can say “Here's what our research shows. Here's how you should give them.”
It can look so many different ways in different companies, but generally it is a company figuring out what can be put in place to make the environment more conducive to health, and then bringing into that mix the motivation of individual workers to be engaged participants.
–Nico Pronk, PhD
Vice President and Health Science Officer, HealthPartners Research Foundation
Safety and a culture of concern for safety is the foundation on which to build opportunities for people to adopt healthy behaviors that transcend the workplace and begin to affect the choices they make in communities where they live, in their families with their children, in their schools, their churches. You begin to see the extraordinary payoffs of things that can be catalyzed by what employers do.
What Is the Value to an Employer of a TWH Program? Is There a Return On Investment?
A few years ago, we were at a meeting of companies that had gotten awards for progressive programs—for worker engagement, flex scheduling, a variety of things. A number of CFOs and CEOs were present, and none of them said that return on investment was their motivation. They all felt that this was an ethical, human issue; they felt some connection to the workforce; they knew people had discontents and they thought they could manage them. The economic arguments came later, once they had programs in place and were trying to evaluate them.
The kind of return that you are going to see is quality and performance. People need to be in a place where they can use their skills, feel like they are making an impact on their job, and are happy to come to work every day. If those things are true, the employer is going to get a lot of productivity from their employees. It is also going to make the organization look good!
–Suzanne Nobrega, MSW
Outreach Director, Co-Director, Center for the Promotion of Health in the New England Workforce
University of Massachusetts-Lowell
We have clear indicators that worksite health promotion has a very strong return on investment. And we also have indicators around occupational safety and health. We still need an ongoing evaluation of how those come together in terms of economic outcomes. That research is ongoing, but it is very promising.
What is stimulating the “late adopter” employers to use TWH is the realization that without this approach, people default to behaviors in other environments and can become unhealthy. And employers begin to see the results, the most obvious being that people are not at work, and when they are not at work, employers have to figure out how to keep up the outputs in the absence of a vital production component. The other result is people are at work but they are not well. So they do not perform as well, and again employers have to figure out how to keep the same number of widgets coming out the back end with a weak link in the chain. And there is the result that is really compelled all of these changes: if employers provide health care coverage, employees begin to use massive amounts of it, and it is incredibly expensive. In fact, it has become the single most expensive component of labor cost that is not wages, and that has really caught the attention of employers.
Small employers are going to be the biggest beneficiaries because TWH is about efficient programs. By integrating the approaches, you have a more efficient way of implementing all the elements.
We have been keeping a very large database on our population the whole time we have been doing this program. We have decreased our workers compensation rate by 80%. We have decreased our long-term disability rate by an equivalent amount. Our medical trend is about 2% a year, and we have relatively low turnover for a call center environment. So yes, there is definitely a return, but you have to be prepared to invest in the tools you need to be able to show it.
–Peter Wald MD, MPH
VP, Enterprise Medical Director
What Advice Would You Give an Employer—Especially a Small Business Owner—Who Wants to Start a TWH Program?
I would advise them to start with health and safety. Once you have got a safe environment, you build on it by bringing wellness in. They are complementary programs; they can use the same resources, and that is where the cost savings come. And you can share skill sets.
–W. Kent Anger, PhD
Director, Oregon Healthy Workforce Center
I study work–life integration, work–family integration, and how organizations can better support working families. So I would encourage employers to increase work flexibility and supervisor support, with the idea of increasing workers' control around work and family, which will enable them to have more time to focus on being healthy.
An important early step would be an assessment of your employees. You can get information from your health plan and your records related to absenteeism and worker compensation—and just by saying to your employees, “Here's a range of health and safety programs that we could offer. What are you most interested in? What would be most valuable to you?
Small employers can do most of the things large employers can do, but there is this sense that “we don't have the resources to do that...” You can do things by finding resources in the community. You do not have to build a gym; there are gyms or fitness centers in the community. You do not have to have an expert in nutrition—you may not even have a cafeteria at the workplace—but there are places where people eat, and you can teach employees to make good choices. And if you do that with collaborators, with other small businesses, it is a wonderful way to share resources and get shared benefits.
It is not an “either/or.” It has steps along a continuum. Even adopting some preliminary steps—maybe it is not full coordination or integration, but at least creating communication across those sectors is a step in the direction of enhancing their overall functioning in the organization.
A lot of things in your built environment send messages, and it is important to think about the message you are sending. For example, our cafeteria—if you walked into our cafeteria with $3, the message we were sending was that all you could eat was burgers and fries, and that was not the message we wanted to send. So we reengineered the way we present food, with the healthy items at eye level (and we have made them a little less expensive). There are a lot of simple things that you can do. We are also part of a business group in San Antonio that is relatively new, and part of our mission is knowledge transfer from the larger to the smaller employers. So I would say find a large-employer mentor or join a business group that can help you.
The “why to do it” is that there is benefit on both the employer and employee sides, and a win-win situation is more likely to have a good outcome. The “how to do it” is the challenge. First, think big. Then start smart: figure out what you can do tomorrow, the easy “wins” you can put into place quickly that show everyone involved that this is do-able. Make those decisions transparent to your workers and involve them in the discussion. And then expand over time. You have your broad vision because you thought big to start with, so then you ask, “What do we need to do to get to that vision?”
Smaller employers, those who employ fewer that 50 people—and that constitute 97% of the employers in Iowa—have a tougher time figuring this out. Where do they get information? The NIOSH Centers for Excellence can be “destination sites” for information. We also have the responsibility to convene the experts, which is what we did with this TWH Symposium. We brought together the most knowledgeable people in the country who are doing most of the research in this area, and all of it will be available to employers on-line.
–James A. Merchant
The most important thing is the top person's leadership—the commitment and genuine caring of the leader. That dictates the success of the program. Another element would be to allow employees to have as much decision making as possible. People need to feel good about themselves and their work, and that is all about having choices and the ability to decide how to do their work, so they can apply their full skill set. That instills a sense of control and well-being, which helps reduce stress. Having a mentally healthy place to work is as important as physical aspects of the workplace.
We are getting inquiries from small businesses around the country about how to get started, and one of the first things we say is, “Look at what you're already doing.” You may have somebody with HR responsibilities, someone with safety responsibilities, people responsible for health promotion activities, or for health benefits—hopefully these are not all the same person! Have these people sit down together and talk about their goals and activities, because what it boils down to is that their goals are all the same—to have healthy workers who are at work, who are contributing, and who thrive in the workplace.
James A. Merchant, with John Howard, Wes Alles, Leslie Hammer, Laura Punnett, Martin Sepulveda, Martin Cherniack, Michael Parkinson, Anita Schill, Jack Dennerlein, Casey Chosewood, Diane Rohlman, Glorian Sorenson, Neil Kohatsu, Nico Pronk, Suzanne Nobrega, Peter Wald, and Kent Anger
Acknowledgments: We recognize and thank Kim Merchant, writer/editor for the HWCE, for framing these questions and giving the 18 interviews, and Lamia Zia for videotaping the interviews cited above. We also thank Del Bonney, writer/editor for the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, for transcribing, formatting, and editing these comments.
2012 Total Worker Health™ Symposium: Safe, Healthy and Cost-Effective Solutions
The Marriott Hotel in Coralville, Iowa
November 29 to 30, 2012
Thursday, November 29
8:15 to 8:30 AM: Welcoming Comments
James A. Merchant, MD, DrPH, Director, University of Iowa College of Public Health, HWCE
John Howard, MD, Director, NIOSH
8:30 to 8:55 AM: Plenary Session 1
Total Worker Health: Innovative Approaches to Promoting and Protecting Worker Health
Glorian Sorensen, PhD, Director, Harvard School of Public Health Center for Work, Health and Wellbeing
9:00 to 10:00 AM:
Examining National Trends in Worker Health with the National Health Interview Survey
Sara Luckhaupt, MD, MPH, NIOSH
Making the Business Case for Integrated Worksite Health Promotion/Protection Interventions,
One Intervention at a Time
Suzanne Nobrega, MS, Outreach Director, CPH-NEW
The Value of Social Media in Reaching and Engaging Employers in Total Worker Health
Heidi Hudson, MPH, CHES, Coordinator, NIOSH TWH™ Program
Jennifer L. Hall, EdD, MCHES, Outreach Director, HWCE
10:30 to 10:55 AM: Plenary Session 2
Participatory Ergonomics as a Model for Integrated Programs to Prevent Musculoskeletal Disorders
Laura Punnett, ScD, Co-Director, Center for the Promotion of Health in the New England Workforce (CPH-NEW)
11:00 to 12:00 PM:
An Economic Analysis of a Safe Resident Handling Program in Nursing Homes
Supriya Lahiri, PhD, CPHNEW
Physically Demanding Work and Physical Activity in Health Care Workers: Developing Key
Messages for Integrated Interventions
Jack Dennerlein, PhD, Harvard Center for Work, Health, and Wellbeing
Effect of Participatory Ergonomics Training on Non-Ergonomist Ratings of Ergonomics Exposures
Nathan Fethke, PhD, HWCE
12:00 to 1:30 PM: Luncheon Speaker
Helping Companies and Organizations to Grow: An Employer Health and Productivity Roadmap
Mike Parkinson, MD, MPH, FACPM, Senior Medical Director, UPMC Health Plan and WorkPartners
1:30 to 1:55 PM: Plenary Session 3
Engaging Employees: Qualitative Findings from Be Hipp (Be Engaged: Help Integrate Promotion/Protection)
Linda Snetselaar, PhD, RD, LD, UI Nutrition Center, HWCE
2:00 to 3:00 PM:
Assessing Occupational and Personal Risk Factors in Illness and Injury–-Basic Approaches and Beyond
Sudha Pandalai, MD, PhD, Medical Officer, NIOSH
PUSHing Young Employees to Total Worker Health™: How Focus Groups Go Online
Diane Rohlman, PhD, Oregon Healthy Workforce Center
UChoose: A Collaboration of the University of Iowa's Academic and Hospital Campuses to Promote Healthy Eating
Megan Hammes, MS, ATC, MCHES, Manager, UI Wellness
3:30 to 3:55 PM: Plenary Session 4
Workplace Interventions and Approaches to Reduce Work-Life Stress
Leslie Hammer, PhD, Associate Director, Oregon Healthy WorkForce Center (ORhwc);
Director, Occupational Health Psychology, Portland State University
4:00 to 5:00 PM:
Shift Work and Associated Health Outcomes in Police Officers
Penelope Baughman, PhD, Epidemic Intelligence Service Officer, NIOSH
Correction Officers: Rapid Onset of Musculoskeletal Symptoms With Job Tenure
Martin Cherniack, MD, CPH-NEW
BeWell Employee Incentive Program Creates a Culture of Wellness at Stanford
Wes Alles, PhD, Stanford Prevention Research Center
Friday, November 30
8:00 to 8:15 AM: Senator Tom Harkin, D-Iowa (via video)
8:15 to 8:30 AM: Governor Terry Branstad (via video)
8:30 to 9:30 AM: Plenary Session 5
Integrated Health Programs, Outcomes and Return on Investment
Nico Pronk, PhD, Health Partners, EAC member of UI and Harvard
Integrated Health Programs, Outcomes and Return on Investment: Measuring Worksite Health Promotion and Integrated Program Effectiveness
Martin Cherniack, MD, University of Connecticut and Co-PI, CPH-NEW
9:30 to 10:00 AM:
NIOSH Total Worker Health™ Program
Anita L. Schill, PhD, MPH, MA, Senior Science Advisor, NIOSH
L. Casey Chosewood, MD, Senior Medical Officer for TWH™, NIOSH
10:30 to 11:00 AM: Plenary Session 6
From Worker Health to “Citizen Health”: Roles of Health Care Delivery, Public Health and Big Data Transformations
Martin Sepulveda, MD, MPH, IBM Fellow
11:05 to 11:25 AM:
Key Trends From the 2012 Iowa Employer Benefits Study
David P. Lind, David P. Lind Benchmark
11:30 to 12:30 PM: Panel Presentation
Providing Affordable Health Care to Iowa Workers and Employers
Senator Jack Hatch
Ron Reed, CEO, Mercy Hospital Iowa City
Cliff Gold, CoOportunity Health
Dan Kueter, Provicare, LLC
A Mixed Methods Approach to Understanding Leisure-Time Physical Activity and Musculoskeletal Pain Among Construction Workers: Findings From a Pilot Study
Alberto Caban-Martinez, Harvard Center for Work, Health, and Wellbeing
A Qualitative Assessment of Nutrition Experiences
Kim Merchant, MA, UI Nutrition Center, HWCE
Practical Tools for Implementing Worksite Wellness-Be Engaged: Help Integrate Promotion/Protection (Be Hipp)
Donna Hollinger, MS, RD, LD, UI Nutrition Center, HWCE
Company-Instituted Wellness Programs and Nursing Home Employees' Health
Gabriela Kernan, CPH-NEW
Differences Among Nursing Homes in Outcomes of a Safe Resident Handling Program
Alicia Kurowski, CPH-NEW
Effects of Program Structure on Group Facilitation in a Participatory Health Protection/Health Promotion Program
Bora Plaku-Alakbarova, University of Connecticut, CPH-NEW
Evaluating Stress Resilience: A Worksite Intervention to Reduce Stress and CVD Risk Factors in Police
Sandra Ramey, HWCE, University of Iowa
Evaluating the Impact of a Health Risk Management (HRM) Program on Employees' Health Risks, and Workers' Compensation
Kaylan Stinson, MSPH, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO
Food Service Audits: A Tool for Improving Nutrition Environments in the Worksite
Lois Ahrens, UI Nutrition Center, HWCE
Healthy Workplaces? A Survey of Massachusetts Employers
Patricia Tremblay, CPH-NEW
Paid Sick Leave and Nonfatal Occupational Injury
Abay Asfaw Getahun, NIOSH
Methodology for Modeling Normative Three-Dimensional Strength
John M. Looft, University of Iowa
Modeling Localized Muscle Fatigue during Intermittent Tasks as a Function of Intensity and Duty Cycle
John M. Looft, University of Iowa
Research Based Wellness Innovation at ACT
Tracy K. Tunwall, Mount Mercy University and ACT
Shift Work and Cancer Screening: Do Women Who Work Alternative Shifts Undergo Recommended Cancer Screening?
Rebecca Tsai, NIOSH
Team-Based Challenge Delivers More Than Cost Savings
Erin Litton, MA, CHES, ACSM-HFS, Consultant, UI Wellness
Total Worker Health™ Plus—Including Environmental Health to Meet the Sustainability Challenge
Rick Yoder, PE, Chief Sustainability Officer, University of Nebraska at Omaha
Worksite Wellness in Small Businesses: A Systematic Review of Perceived Barriers and Evidence for Intervention Effectiveness
Kaylan Stinson, MSPH, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO
Hosted by the University of Iowa College of Public Health, Healthier Workforce Center for Excellence.
Sponsored by the NIOSH Total Worker Health™ Program.
Cosponsored by David P. Lind Benchmark, CoOpportunity Health, Corridor Business Journal, Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance, Heartland Center for Occupational Health and Safety, Iowa Association of Business and Industry, Iowa Academy of Family Physicians, Iowa Business Council, Iowa Hospital Association, Iowa Medical Society, State Public Policy Group, the University of Iowa Labor Center, Wellness Council of Iowa, and WorkSafe Iowa.
Copyright © 2013 by the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine